Re: [nfsv4] Benoit Claise's Block on charter-ietf-nfsv4-05-00: (with BLOCK and COMMENT)

Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com> Fri, 15 September 2017 07:13 UTC

Return-Path: <bclaise@cisco.com>
X-Original-To: nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: nfsv4@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4117D13304B; Fri, 15 Sep 2017 00:13:43 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -14.5
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-14.5 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HTML_MESSAGE=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-5, SPF_PASS=-0.001, USER_IN_DEF_DKIM_WL=-7.5] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (1024-bit key) header.d=cisco.com
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id E2zrCYCypgpM; Fri, 15 Sep 2017 00:13:41 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from aer-iport-3.cisco.com (aer-iport-3.cisco.com [173.38.203.53]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-SEED-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 060E5133046; Fri, 15 Sep 2017 00:13:40 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/simple; d=cisco.com; i=@cisco.com; l=7491; q=dns/txt; s=iport; t=1505459621; x=1506669221; h=subject:to:cc:references:from:message-id:date: mime-version:in-reply-to; bh=jyFeVcYf9UCF/kK8uaJ+XT6cBTlFyuCKiA5B20bhHKA=; b=LeDdsibNWunq1easoDG7XVoSQTaN00srJPpysUjK7aI75f040eJxA3Cs 6wnQtj2wlXBI2DA3wlLkssipOlwCsmL59FzSupW0OmcTdHn4iNg6bvlpI Nit7ALT6F9T/zzOl5neNtecF0Sv15vQJk5g0hC9OgJXghyxvT1IQoMA+E s=;
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Filtered: true
X-IronPort-Anti-Spam-Result: A0CzAQA3fbtZ/xbLJq1dGQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBBwEBAQEBgm+CPSeDd4sUkEYriDuILYdSCoU8AoRoFAECAQEBAQEBAWsohRkBBSNIDhALGCcDAgIhJREGAQwGAgEBihcDFatogicnhw8Ng24BAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBAQEBH4Mrg1KBYyuCfYJYhTOCYAWYPYgJPI9bhHeLVYchjFiBBIdVgTk2IYENMiEIHBWGGIFQPjaJEwEBAQ
X-IronPort-AV: E=Sophos;i="5.42,396,1500940800"; d="scan'208,217";a="655657449"
Received: from aer-iport-nat.cisco.com (HELO aer-core-3.cisco.com) ([173.38.203.22]) by aer-iport-3.cisco.com with ESMTP/TLS/DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384; 15 Sep 2017 07:13:36 +0000
Received: from [10.55.221.36] (ams-bclaise-nitro3.cisco.com [10.55.221.36]) by aer-core-3.cisco.com (8.14.5/8.14.5) with ESMTP id v8F7DaOW024372; Fri, 15 Sep 2017 07:13:36 GMT
To: Chuck Lever <chuck.lever@oracle.com>, spencer shepler <spencer.shepler@gmail.com>
Cc: David Noveck <davenoveck@gmail.com>, "nfsv4-chairs@ietf.org" <nfsv4-chairs@ietf.org>, NFSv4 <nfsv4@ietf.org>, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
References: <150537392913.12691.17798959041359292248.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <CAKKJt-dr_-AiaEsaF7aQQCwKJyT_ayX6npPpNmaGAy5zUExZPA@mail.gmail.com> <CADaq8je2hCB+-keYNxG94V9F_DhNErzwDOWY9fLgBb3v_esCBg@mail.gmail.com> <CAFt6Bak-i5NJBLbBkH9vvtLfd=EKNtRO5N=Bg__UjU94xoOC=w@mail.gmail.com> <18A647FE-FFF3-4E12-8281-4886AF8D0C9C@oracle.com>
From: Benoit Claise <bclaise@cisco.com>
Message-ID: <3cd56e24-583e-2f70-9fe8-b9b4c37643fc@cisco.com>
Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2017 09:13:36 +0200
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:52.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <18A647FE-FFF3-4E12-8281-4886AF8D0C9C@oracle.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="------------54582DDBB26D4E81C8A5567E"
Content-Language: en-US
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/nfsv4/IpV87IPTnVzqjKbEWLZBygrmJB8>
Subject: Re: [nfsv4] Benoit Claise's Block on charter-ietf-nfsv4-05-00: (with BLOCK and COMMENT)
X-BeenThere: nfsv4@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.22
Precedence: list
List-Id: NFSv4 Working Group <nfsv4.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/nfsv4>, <mailto:nfsv4-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/nfsv4/>
List-Post: <mailto:nfsv4@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:nfsv4-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/nfsv4>, <mailto:nfsv4-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 15 Sep 2017 07:13:43 -0000

On 9/14/2017 11:03 PM, Chuck Lever wrote:
>
> On Sep 14, 2017, at 8:41 AM, spencer shepler 
> <spencer.shepler@gmail.com <mailto:spencer.shepler@gmail.com>> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 14, 2017 at 6:13 AM, David Noveck <davenoveck@gmail.com 
>> <mailto:davenoveck@gmail.com>> wrote:
>>
>>     >  but changing the IANA registry procedure to insert the working
>>     group wasn't something I saw being proposed during recharter
>>     discussion
>>
>>     I agree.  I was under the impression that Chuck, when he proposed
>>     this text, believed,he was merely restating explicitly what was
>>     already in effect.  While it is true that, formally speaking, the
>>     working group as such, has no role in this process, as a
>>     practical matter, the working group will be consulted.  For
>>     example, when Spencer S is the designated expert, the normal
>>     expectation would be that he would consult the working group
>>     regarding anything that was not straightforward.
>>
>>     I think that if anyone thought that a change in the IANA registry
>>     procedure was being proposed, they would have pointed that out
>>     and discussed the matter.  After all, there have been no problems
>>     with the existing procedure.  The working group is consulted when
>>     necessary.
>>
>>
>> Correct.  A change in IANA behavior/procedure was not the intent.
>>
>>
>>     > So, we'll do the right thing (and hold onto your BLOCK position
>>     until we figure out what that is).
>>
>>     I think it would be best to simply delete "The working group is
>>     also responsible for approving changes to RPC- and
>>     NFS-related IANA registries.".  I'd like to be sure that both
>>     Chuck and Spencer S aare OK with that.
>>
>>
>> Agreed with as proposed.
>>
>> Chuck?
>
> No objection to removing the offending sentence.
That would obviously solve my DISCUSS.

Regards, B.